Branimir's Open Letter to Games Workshop

[MGibster]

from a narrative point of view, this just sounds like a story about some guy who discovered Warhammer as a kid and thought it was magical, but then he became an adult and refused to take serious issues with any real maturity.

I do think the root of their fear is that the game is changing into something different from what it was when they were younger. I do have some sympathy with that position, when I go back and watch the original Star Wars trilogy I was want to be my seven year old self enjoying it for what it is. I don't want to think about it critically. But Warhammer as we know it has changed quite a bit since it's inception in 1987's Rogue Trader. It wasn't the same by the time Warhammer 2nd edition came out in 1993, it wasn't the same when third edition came out in 1998, etc., etc. It's in a constant state of flux.

also iirc both the 40k and WHF canon have changed radically multiple times since I first got into it 20 years ago, the sudden inclusion black Ultramarines apropos of nothing is peanuts compared to some of the other stuff I heard of over the years. like having little to no narrative justification seems in line with how things usually go.

You're absolutely right both about the lore changing and how silly it is to be concerned about the inclusion of a black Ultramarine. But I think the concern many of them have is that the game is becoming less "grim dark" in en effort to be more appealing young people and to avoid offending parents. And I think they're partially correct on this account.

As an example, let's take a look at Daemonette of Slaanesh models over the years.

1. 1989: Mutant looking women with crab claws and one exposed breast.
2. 1994(or 5): Mutant looking humanoids with clothes, crab claws, and not an ounce of femininity.
3. 2000: Sleek feminine looking demons many of whom have exposed breats. Some of them have three sets of breasts.
4. 2008: Sleek feminine looking demons with one breast (covered) and a somewhat non-binary look. Are they male, female, or both?

My favorite models are from 2000 because I think they look great. They're often called the Juan Diaz daemonnettes and you can google it if you want to see them. But I'm a guy who thinks context is important, and while I wouldn't have a problem painting or using those models in a game at home I could not use them in a public space where I knew young people could be around. Can you imagine a kid taking their mother to the game store to buy some Warhammer products and she sees some adults playing the game with an army that included six boobed warrior women? Games Workshop doesn't want that. If I owned a game shop I wouldn't want that. But despite those changes, it's not like the game isn't still grim dark in it's setting. We just have fewer demon boobs on the table.

okay, not sure why the moderate majority would feel the need to be offended by the statement GW put out. if "WARHAMMER IS FOR EVERYONE!", if Warhammer is just a game then it shouldn't matter to them if their space marines are suddenly not just a bunch of white dudes.

For some of them I think it's just a reminder that the game is changing and it's not the same as it was when they were younger. They could certainly pick a better way to express their dislike for some of the changes. For others, yeah, they appear fairly racist to me.

 

[Neonchameleon]

@macd21 and @Morrus. This line specifically is my issue.
When EVERYTHING is deemed political, even the act of roleplaying, you might as well call all books of fiction, movies, EVERYTHING political. If that is how you want to define it, sure have at it, just do not expect that perspective to not cause fractures within the player base.

Almost all fiction is political. Yes, even escapist fiction.

And the perspective causing fractures in the player base isn't the perspective that almost all fction is political. It's the counter-factual claim that one particular group of works of fiction is just fine and should be called apolitical and never be questioned.

The "it's got politics so it's a problem" reminds me of nothing more than the anti-vaxers objecting that vaccines contain chemicals and this makes them bad.

 

[MGibster]

Is GW in the US? Is Branimir in the US?
Does everyone in the US—or even all Warhammer fans in the US—see things the same way?

This is one of those things I see online but I don't run into in real life. Even online, a lot of people are excited about the soon-to-be-released 9th edition of the game and most aren't complaining about the fact that some of the Space Marines are painted with a darker skin tone. Those who are complaining about forced diversity are a minority but they're vocal and they certainly have their followers. I think some of them jokingly call it Wokehammer.

 

[Morrus]

@macd21 and @Morrus. This line specifically is my issue.
When EVERYTHING is deemed political, even the act of roleplaying, you might as well call all books of fiction, movies, EVERYTHING political. If that is how you want to define it, sure have at it, just do not expect that perspective to not cause fractures within the player base.

It’s just a word, not something to be scared of. Yes, everything does touch on politics; it can’t not. Politics is the methodology of our world. It’s not a perspective, it’s just how it is.

 

[macd21]

@macd21 and @Morrus. This line specifically is my issue.
When EVERYTHING is deemed political, even the act of roleplaying, you might as well call all books of fiction, movies, EVERYTHING political. If that is how you want to define it, sure have at it, just do not expect that perspective to not cause fractures within the player base.

Yes? Everything is political, all books of fiction, movies, everything. The reason the player base ‘fractures’ is because the politics of the media is changing, not because the politics weren’t there.

 

[Bagpuss]

Well, that's a different discussion altogether. Can we agree that the statement is fine, and that disagreement with it is problematic?

Well no, that's the problem.

I totally agree with the statement in principle, but it doesn't say anything about the details.

"We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray through miniatures, art and storytelling so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to."

For example does that mean female space marines some point down the line? Because that turns on the head a whole host of lore about gene-seeds and the like, which someone might have a problem with, while still not being opposed to more female characters being represented in general.

Are they not going to be missed? Just because they disagree with one method of representation, even though there are plenty of others available?

People can certainly agree in principle but not agree on the details of how things are made more inclusive and diverse.

"If not, you will not be missed."

Does tend to imply you aren't going to listen to any disagreement or discussion. It's a my way or the highway sort of statement.

 

[Panda-s1]

I do think the root of their fear is that the game is changing into something different from what it was when they were younger. I do have some sympathy with that position, when I go back and watch the original Star Wars trilogy I was want to be my seven year old self enjoying it for what it is. I don't want to think about it critically. But Warhammer as we know it has changed quite a bit since it's inception in 1987's Rogue Trader. It wasn't the same by the time Warhammer 2nd edition came out in 1993, it wasn't the same when third edition came out in 1998, etc., etc. It's in a constant state of flux.



You're absolutely right both about the lore changing and how silly it is to be concerned about the inclusion of a black Ultramarine. But I think the concern many of them have is that the game is becoming less "grim dark" in en effort to be more appealing young people and to avoid offending parents. And I think they're partially correct on this account.

As an example, let's take a look at Daemonette of Slaanesh models over the years.

1. 1989: Mutant looking women with crab claws and one exposed breast.
2. 1994(or 5): Mutant looking humanoids with clothes, crab claws, and not an ounce of femininity.
3. 2000: Sleek feminine looking demons many of whom have exposed breats. Some of them have three sets of breasts.
4. 2008: Sleek feminine looking demons with one breast (covered) and a somewhat non-binary look. Are they male, female, or both?

My favorite models are from 2000 because I think they look great. They're often called the Juan Diaz daemonnettes and you can google it if you want to see them. But I'm a guy who thinks context is important, and while I wouldn't have a problem painting or using those models in a game at home I could not use them in a public space where I knew young people could be around. Can you imagine a kid taking their mother to the game store to buy some Warhammer products and she sees some adults playing the game with an army that included six boobed warrior women? Games Workshop doesn't want that. If I owned a game shop I wouldn't want that. But despite those changes, it's not like the game isn't still grim dark in it's setting. We just have fewer demon boobs on the table.



For some of them I think it's just a reminder that the game is changing and it's not the same as it was when they were younger. They could certainly pick a better way to express their dislike for some of the changes. For others, yeah, they appear fairly racist to me.

idk I feel it goes well beyond appealing to young people and parents. actually the daemonettes and Slaanesh themself would be a good example of this. like when they came up with Slaanesh in the 80's having a god who was both male and female at the same time was like "whoa how mysterious and alien! this god has and enjoys all the holes how lustful o:" same thing with the daemonettes like "hey there young adolescent man who's in our target demographic look at this sexy demon woman isn't she hot but maybe she's actually A MAN??? how sinful! o:" nowadays it's like "oh hey gender non-conforming and non-binary people are real and want respect, uh...." I don't think this means we have to do away with Slaanesh, at their core they're about hedonism which is still an actual problem. I also can't remember if Slaanesh is the only gender non-conforming entity in Warhammer, if they are that's a serious issue they should address, but emphasizing other characters like that who aren't literal demons can be a positive thing.

hell the production of plastic sisters is a huge step forward, like it went from a goddamn meme to actually making them accessible to players who don't have hundreds of dollars to spend on a large number of pewter models. I'd look into getting back in, but I know better, but at least I appreciate a company with a reputation as bad as GW actually making an honest effort to address these issues.

 

[Lem23]

Summary:

Bigoted idiot: "We don't want black people, women, gay gaymers, trans gamers at our tables."

GW: "We do want them, and we don't want you."

Bigoted idiot: "Waaah! That's exclusionary!"

 

[Immeril]

Well no, that's the problem.
For example does that mean female space marines some point down the line? Because that turns on the head a whole host of lore about gene-seeds and the like, which someone might have a problem with, while still not being opposed to more female characters being represented in general.

Perhaps Cawl has a SECOND hidden vault? To be revealed in 10th edition...

 

[Panda-s1]

For example does that mean female space marines some point down the line? Because that turns on the head a whole host of lore about gene-seeds and the like, which someone might have a problem with, while still not being opposed to more female characters being represented in general.

Are they not going to be missed? Just because they disagree with one method of representation, even though there are plenty of others available?

People can certainly agree in principle but not agree on the details of how things are made more inclusive and diverse.

yes, you're right, the idea of including women in a group of genetically enhanced soldiers who are augmented and mutated to the point where they're no longer considered human and already had a new iteration become canon in a universe where "canon" is a vague notion that can be changed on a whim would be lore breaking and just feel like forced diversity

like, seriously, I want you to think of what gaming was like when 40k was new and they came up with the idea that only men can become space marines. I want you to think of why they made that statement and why now they might do away with that notion. like sheesh, they haven't even said anything of that sort to my knowledge, but the fact that this is a sacred cow of the highest order for some fans certainly reveals priorities.